My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6/25/1980
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1980
>
6/25/1980
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:48:53 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 12:08:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/25/1980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
108
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
JUN 2 51980 BOOK 43 PAGE 90 <br />CONSTRUCTION PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE HERCULES KONTOULAS <br />COMMENTED ON THE MEMORANDUM FROM JUDGE SMITH. HE STATED THAT <br />PARAGRAPH 1, WHICH SETS OUT THE NEED FOR A TWELVE MAN JURY BOX IN <br />ONE COURTROOM WOULD REQUIRE A CHANGE ORDER TO EXTEND THE PLATFORM <br />AND BUY % MORE CHAIRS AND MOVE THE EXISTING CHAIRS CLOSER TO THE <br />WALL. THE COST WOULD BE MINIMAL, AND WE WOULD RECEIVE CREDIT FOR <br />ELIMINATING THE PLATFORM IN THE TWO CIRCUIT COURTROOMS ONE STEP. <br />HE FELT IT MAY BE A TRADE-OFF ON CREDIT. <br />COMMISSIONER LYONS WAS OF THE OPINION THAT WE SHOULD BE <br />MORE CONCERNED THAT WE HAVE ADEQUATE FACILITIES THAN WORRYING ABOUT' <br />TRADE-OFFS. HE POINTED OUT THAT WE MUST CONSIDER THE GROWTH IN THE <br />COURT SYSTEM AND IN THIS COUNTY. <br />MR. KONTOULAS STATED THAT THEY ARE DEALING WITH COSTS, <br />AND COMMISSIONER LYONS SAID HE WAS AWARE OF THAT, BUT THERE IS NO <br />SENSE IN HAVING A FACILITY WHICH WON'T MEET THE NEED. <br />MR. KONTOULAS THEN DISCUSSED PARAGRAPH 2 IN REGARD TO <br />EXTENDING THE NORTH WALL OF THE EAST CIRCUIT COURTROOM INTO THE <br />PROPOSED LOBBY AREA. HE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE STUDS ARE <br />ALREADY IN PLACE IN THE WALLS, AND TO EXPAND NORTH 5'9" WOULD <br />ELIMINATE THE WINDOW IN THE LOBBY AND REQUIRE REMOVING THE STUDS. <br />ALSO, THEY ARE ROUGHING IN THE ELECTRICAL RIGHT NOW. IN REGARD TO <br />RETAINING ONE WINDOW IN EACH CIRCUIT COURTROOM, AS IN PARAGRAPH 4, HE <br />SAW NO PROBLEM IN HANDLING THAT. MR. KONTOULAS INFORMED THE BOARD <br />THAT HE BROUGHT THE AIR CONDITIONING SET UP TO THE ATTENTION OF THE <br />ARCHITECT SEVERAL TIMES, BUT BECAUSE OF THE COST FACTOR, THEY DE- <br />CIDED TO LEAVE THE WINDOW UNITS IN AND STATED IT WAS IMPRACTICAL <br />TO INSTALL CENTRAL AIR CONDITIONING,THOUGH HE ARGUED AGAINST THIS <br />STRONGLY. MR. KONTOULAS CONTINUED THAT HE ALSO ASKED IF THE UNIT <br />IN THE EXISTING COURTROOM COULD BE INSTALLED IN THE LOBBY USING <br />THE EXISTING DUCT AND THAT WAS REPRESENTED BACK TO HIM AS BEING <br />IMPRACTICAL BECAUSE THE UNIT WAS A RESIDENTIAL TYPE UNIT. MR. <br />KONTOULAS UNDERSTOOD THAT THE 2-1/2 TON AIR CONDITIONING UNIT THAT <br />WILL HANDLE THE HEARING ROOMS AND THE SECRETARIAL AREA HAS ALREADY <br />BEEN PURCHASED, HE DISCUSSED GOING TO A 6-1/2 TON UNIT, WHICH HE <br />ESTIMATED WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY $5,000, ALLOWING PROBABLY $1,000 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.